On Fri, 8 May 2009, Christian Perrier wrote:
I bringed the discussion in out maintenance list but dropping
Recommends to Suggests is likely to make us provide a "broken" home page
for SWAT by default. We could of course patch SWAT so that the page
explicitely says that adding samba-doc is needed
Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> Frankly there is far less difference between GLIBC 2.9 and EGLIBC 2.9
> than between GLIBC 2.9 and GLIBC 2.10.
>
> I could also have just taken the EGLIBC patches and put them in
> debian/patches, no one would have noticed.
I'm sure your decision will either,
1. work per
Package: general
Severity: wishlist
Just an idea.
Currently, when I am using a new package, or if I have queries
regarding the new package, my friends are upstream and the web.
Usually, not much authentic information.
I am requesting a tracker kind approach for each package.
It could be very sim
Y Giridhar Appaji Nag wrote:
> I filed a lintian wishlist bug (#527363) requesting a I/W tag when non
> documentation packages recommend documentation packages.
(...)
>
> Would there be any objections to filing minor/wishlist bugs against these
> packages? I am including a tentative dd-list corr
Ben Finney wrote:
> Manoj Srivastava writes:
>
>> On Thu, May 07 2009, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>>
>>> Le jeudi 07 mai 2009 à 11:02 +1000, Ben Finney a écrit :
Those who want a read-only ‘/usr’ don't seriously try to leave it
read-only while installing or upgrading packages, do they?
>>
pe, 2009-05-08 kello 11:43 +0800, Paul Wise kirjoitti:
> I find the notion of a "default MTA" to be silly. Most desktops or
> laptops or cellphones proably do not need an MTA.
I'd agree, were it not for cron.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
Quoting Y Giridhar Appaji Nag (app...@debian.org):
> Debian Samba Maintainers
>samba
swat Recommends: samba-doc
swat is a web interface to administer samba. Its main page currently
has links to Samba documentation in HTML.
I bringed the discussion in out maintenance list but dropping
Reco
As a practical matter, downgrading these dependencies will cause
aptitude and other package managers to believe that the documentation
is unnecessary and suggest removing it.
Daniel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? C
On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 1:01 AM, Harald Braumann wrote:
> I never talked about Exim. I was just opposing the proposition, that
> some esoteric mailer like nullsmtp or esmtp will become the default in
> Debian.
I find the notion of a "default MTA" to be silly. Most desktops or
laptops or cellphone
On Thu, May 07 2009, Ben Finney wrote:
> Manoj Srivastava writes:
>
>> On Thu, May 07 2009, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>>
>> > Le jeudi 07 mai 2009 à 11:02 +1000, Ben Finney a écrit :
>> >> Those who want a read-only ‘/usr’ don't seriously try to leave it
>> >> read-only while installing or upgradi
The following is a listing of packages for which help has been requested
through the WNPP (Work-Needing and Prospective Packages) system in the
last week.
Total number of orphaned packages: 389 (new: 9)
Total number of packages offered up for adoption: 111 (new: 1)
Total number of packages request
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Philipp Kern
* Package name: gobby-0.5
Version : 0.4.92
Upstream Author : Armin Burgmeier
* URL : http://gobby.0x539.de/
* License : GPL-2+
Programming Lang: C++
Description : infinote-based collaborative text ed
Manoj Srivastava writes:
> On Thu, May 07 2009, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>
> > Le jeudi 07 mai 2009 à 11:02 +1000, Ben Finney a écrit :
> >> Those who want a read-only ‘/usr’ don't seriously try to leave it
> >> read-only while installing or upgrading packages, do they?
>
> ,[ Excerpt from /
Y Giridhar Appaji Nag ha scritto:
> Would there be any objections to filing minor/wishlist bugs against these
> packages? I am including a tentative dd-list corresponding to the packages
> [1] that I found after manually removing some packages [2]. I will modify it
> based on suggestions.
>
> Lu
On Thu, 7 May 2009 17:55:44 +0530
Y Giridhar Appaji Nag wrote:
> Would there be any objections to filing minor/wishlist bugs against these
> packages? I am including a tentative dd-list corresponding to the packages
> [1] that I found after manually removing some packages [2]. I will modify it
Package: wnpp
Severity: normal
Maintainer asked for help with this package; here his words:
I would welcome a second
set of eyeballs on it - particularly someone with a little more knowledge of
gtk and automake than me. Upstream is pretty responsive (both to me and to
incoming Debian bug reports)
On Thu, May 07 2009, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 07 mai 2009 à 11:02 +1000, Ben Finney a écrit :
>> Those who want a read-only ‘/usr’ don't seriously try to leave it
>> read-only while installing or upgrading packages, do they?
,[ Excerpt from /etc/apt/apt.conf ]
| DPkg
| {
|// Au
Y Giridhar Appaji Nag wrote:
> I filed a lintian wishlist bug (#527363) requesting a I/W tag when non
> documentation packages recommend documentation packages.
That might be a good idea. However, for the texlive packages, we'll just
add lintian overrides.
> With Install-Recommends being the de
On Thu, 07 May 2009 13:28:33 +0200
Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 07 mai 2009 à 13:23 +0200, Harald Braumann a écrit :
> > No, please don't use an esoteric mailer. People who don't know and
> > don't want to know about their local mailer don't need to know about
> > Postfix' complexity. They
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07-05-2009 11:29, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 07 mai 2009 à 10:35 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a
> écrit :
>> I personally find postfix to be lighter and I consider it saner, more secure
>> in theory, and much easier to configure for
On Tue, 5 May 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
Stefano Zacchiroli writes:
Yes, the most repeated argument has been mount /usr via NFS.
Unfortunately, nobody yet explained how do they update the resulting
cluster of machines.
It's not particularly difficult. You update the system master and push
t
Le jeudi 07 mai 2009 à 10:35 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a
écrit :
> I personally find postfix to be lighter and I consider it saner, more secure
> in theory, and much easier to configure for complex tasks.
From my personal experience, postfix makes it easier to do simple tasks,
while exim
On Thu, 07 May 2009, Ben Finney wrote:
> Those who want a read-only ???/usr??? don't seriously try to leave it
> read-only while installing or upgrading packages, do they?
No. And we hook apt to automatically remount stuff rw before it, and try to
remount ro after. It is easy, it works *perfectl
On Thu, 07 May 2009, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 07 mai 2009 à 13:23 +0200, Harald Braumann a écrit :
> > No, please don't use an esoteric mailer. People who don't know and
> > don't want to know about their local mailer don't need to know about
> > Postfix' complexity. They can set up Postf
also sprach Josselin Mouette [2009.05.07.1423 +0200]:
> Both have a very good security track record, so I don’t think the design
> alone justifies a possibly painful transition.
Where's the pain?
0. figure out how to solve #508644 properly, and not only for
default-mta, but default-sysl
Harald Braumann wrote:
On Thu, 07 May 2009 08:01:11 +0200
Giacomo Catenazzi wrote:
No, most of users don't need a full MTA, but only a local MTA
(usually only sendmail command, but ev. only a socket listening to
localhost:25).
SO I would propose a more simple mailer (esmtpd, nullmailer, ...)
Hi debian-devel,
From policy 7.2 Binary Dependencies - Depends, Recommends, Suggests, Enhances,
Pre-Depends
Recommends
This declares a strong, but not absolute, dependency.
The Recommends field should list packages that would be found together
with this one in all but unusual instal
On May 07, Harald Braumann wrote:
> No, please don't use an esoteric mailer. People who don't know and
> don't want to know about their local mailer don't need to know about
> Postfix' complexity. They can set up Postfix with a single debconf
> questions to a minimal configuration. And people who
Le jeudi 07 mai 2009 à 13:36 +0200, martin f krafft a écrit :
> also sprach Josselin Mouette [2009.05.07.1328 +0200]:
> > How is that an improvement over Exim?
>
> There are some of us that have a greater trust level into the
> security and design of postfix.
Both have a very good security track
Martin Langhoff wrote:
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 12:51 PM, Jon Dowland
wrote:
only to say that "this is really just applying a patch, no need to panic".
How about defaulting to assume if the maintainer hasn't posted,
there's no reason to panic. Assume the maintainer knows better than
slashdot or
On 2009-05-07, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Josselin Mouette [2009.05.07.1328 +0200]:
>> How is that an improvement over Exim?
> There are some of us that have a greater trust level into the
> security and design of postfix.
DSA uses Exim on their boxes and even ftp-master runs a public
Jon Dowland, 2009-05-07 11:51:43 +0100 :
> I disagree, this would still warrant a post. Even if the impact is
> insignificant, that is worth saying - "we're doing this, and there's
> no reason to worry."
I'll bite.
The "gforge" package in Debian has been switched from GForge to
FusionForge, wh
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 12:51 PM, Jon Dowland
wrote:
> only to say that "this is really just applying a patch, no need to panic".
How about defaulting to assume if the maintainer hasn't posted,
there's no reason to panic. Assume the maintainer knows better than
slashdot or reddit about his/her own
also sprach Josselin Mouette [2009.05.07.1328 +0200]:
> How is that an improvement over Exim?
There are some of us that have a greater trust level into the
security and design of postfix.
--
.''`. martin f. krafft Related projects:
: :' : proud Debian developer http://d
Le jeudi 07 mai 2009 à 13:23 +0200, Harald Braumann a écrit :
> No, please don't use an esoteric mailer. People who don't know and
> don't want to know about their local mailer don't need to know about
> Postfix' complexity. They can set up Postfix with a single debconf
> questions to a minimal con
On Thu, 07 May 2009 08:01:11 +0200
Giacomo Catenazzi wrote:
> Luk Claes wrote:
> > Steve Langasek wrote:
> >> On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 05:06:26PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> >>> also sprach Carsten Hey [2009.05.05.1645
> >>> +0200]:
> >
> >>> FWIW, Ubuntu did what I consider the right thing:
On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 10:22:33AM +0200, Ana Guerrero wrote:
> Take Aurélien' personal post, remove all the personal comments that he could
> write in his blog but not to d-d-a, and you will see it is not worth a mail
> to d-d-a: "hey, instead of package direclty Drepper's glibc, our glibc will
>
On Thu, 7 May 2009, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
not to see this on slashdot
or other website.
There is a German (not necessarily Linux related) news site who reported
"immediately":
http://www.golem.de/0905/66930.html
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
Il giorno mer, 06/05/2009 alle 23.53 +0200, Josselin Mouette ha scritto:
> Given that the default configuration is extremely simplistic and doesn’t
> use a percent of either exim or postfix features, I still wonder why it
> is not something like nullmailer or ssmtp.
Is nullmailer actively upstream
Le jeudi 07 mai 2009 à 09:37 +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi a écrit :
> Stephen Gran wrote:
> >> But with RPM this works!
> > If that is the case, that's about the only thing that works with RPM.
> Or I missed what RPM do with read-only partitions?
Next time I’ll add the tags.
There has been a disc
Ana Guerrero a écrit :
> On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 10:52:47AM +0530, Ganesan Rajagopal wrote:
>>> Aurelien Jarno writes:
>>> Should we also ask permission to everybody before uploading a new
>>> version of the libc?
>> Of course, not :-). But this one sounds like a big change on the face of it
>
On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 10:52:47AM +0530, Ganesan Rajagopal wrote:
> > Aurelien Jarno writes:
> > Should we also ask permission to everybody before uploading a new
> > version of the libc?
>
> Of course, not :-). But this one sounds like a big change on the face of it
> and raises concerns (l
Stephen Gran wrote:
This one time, at band camp, Josselin Mouette said:
Le jeudi 07 mai 2009 à 11:02 +1000, Ben Finney a écrit :
Those who want a read-only ‘/usr’ don't seriously try to leave it
read-only while installing or upgrading packages, do they?
But with RPM this works!
If that is th
This one time, at band camp, Josselin Mouette said:
> Le jeudi 07 mai 2009 à 11:02 +1000, Ben Finney a écrit :
> > Those who want a read-only ‘/usr’ don't seriously try to leave it
> > read-only while installing or upgrading packages, do they?
>
> But with RPM this works!
If that is the case, tha
2009/5/7 Brian May :
> esmtp can do this, if you configure it to use procmail or something.
I use and like esmtp, but I don't see how we could depend on it as
default MTA if it has to deliver local mail: like you said there must
be procmail installed and esmtp needs some configuration to use it.
Le jeudi 07 mai 2009 à 11:02 +1000, Ben Finney a écrit :
> Those who want a read-only ‘/usr’ don't seriously try to leave it
> read-only while installing or upgrading packages, do they?
But with RPM this works!
--
.''`. Josselin Mouette
: :' :
`. `' “I recommend you to learn English in h
Le jeudi 07 mai 2009 à 03:24 +0200, Marco d'Itri a écrit :
> Because it's expected from a UNIX system to be able to deliver mail to
> local mailboxes.
And who cares a shit about system emails piling up in /var/mail?
--
.''`. Josselin Mouette
: :' :
`. `' “I recommend you to learn English
On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 02:21:05PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> So I think the problem here is not that you made a technically bad
> decision. It sounds like you made a good decision. It's how it was
> communicated.
>
> 1) It didn't happen on any of the official Debian places that
> developers re
>> So, does anybody still see reasons to continue supporting a standalone
>> /usr?
> There had been lots of responses to that.
> You havent presented any supporting your request, so why do you
> want it? Please provide a detailed real-world case. A partial list of
> invalid reasons is: - "Some up
49 matches
Mail list logo
